Vet radiology - different conventions?
False
Radiology
Vet radiology - different conventions?
Chat about radiology with radiologists and those who want to get into the speciality
One of our ginger girls, Saffie, was having a problem with her back left knee, which has subsequently been diagnosed as recurrent patella dislocation. When I visited the vet to get the news that she n
0
Cat:OpenClinicalForum:Radiology
Cat:OpenClinicalForum:RadiologyDiscussion:9554fee3-b079-4ab8-bc2a-54a90770af0a
Forums » Open clinical » Radiology » Vet radiology - different conventions?
|
Vet radiology - different conventions?
posted at 20/8/2012 3:03 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 317
First: 27/10/2011 Last: 8/5/2013 |
One of our ginger girls, Saffie, was having a problem with her back left knee, which has subsequently been diagnosed as recurrent patella dislocation. When I visited the vet to get the news that she needed a realignment operation, we looked at the x-rays together. What struck me as odd was how the vet seemed to be pointing at the wrong side. I told him that convention in humans (he knew I was a radiologist!) was to have the right on the left and vice-versa, and he said it was the other way around for animals, or cats at least. Presumably this is a result of doctors examining humans lying on their back, while vets examine animals on their front and from behind. I forgot to ask him about such conventions for reviewing radiographs and whether they differed between animals - or do you just do the best that you can?! Any vets out there to shed light on this? Here is Saffie in one of her ridiculous poses on the baby's playmat, as usual. Turns out she lies like this to help slide her patellar back in!  I'll see if I can get a picture of the radiograph to post too... |
|
|
Re: Vet radiology - different conventions?
posted at 20/8/2012 9:04 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 1177
First: 19/4/2010 Last: 16/5/2013 |
I remember there being something about CT brain images being originally one way round, then being flipped the other way. Something about neurosurgeons wanting to view the scans the way they look at brains, from above.... My memory fails me..... |
|
|
Re: Vet radiology - different conventions?
posted at 20/8/2012 9:15 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
Posts: 317
First: 27/10/2011 Last: 8/5/2013 |
You are quite right, Dundee! I remember having a conversation with Murray Longmore about this when we worked on OHCM. He seemed certain that head CT images were the other way around to how we now look at them now, which is left-for-right. In fact, having entered the world of General Practice in the late 80's, this could tell us something about when the original convention of left-for-left may still have been used. It is hard to pinpoint when this changed exactly from the internet and associated reputable resources, so I might go old-fashioned for this one and simply ask an elder radiologist! Will let you know...
|
|
|
Re: Vet radiology - different conventions?
posted at 21/8/2012 9:50 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
Posts: 317
First: 27/10/2011 Last: 8/5/2013 |
Dundee - here is a reply from a neuroradiology colleague that sheds a lot of light on this... I cannot give you a precise answer but think that the left for left convention was only used on the earliest EMI scanners that were only able to image heads because it made interpretation for neurosurgeons easier as they are used to operating looking at the head from the top. At some point in the late 70s/early 80s, when CT scanners able to image the body became widely available, the labelling of sides was reversed to harmonise with plain film conventional positioning. He also suggested that I ask the wisened Prof...
|
Forums » Open clinical » Radiology » Vet radiology - different conventions?
